High Variation in Autoflowers

[Buz]

I am relatively new to growing autoflowers but not to growing in general or genetics for that matter. The 10 or so varieties I have grown from various reputable breeders have shown enough variability within cultivars to be a problem. The range goes from little plants that head directly into flowering (that I end up tossing) to large long lived high yield monsters----all from the same seed packet!!. This variation within cultivars can exist with photoperiod plants as well but at least one can extend or shorten veg to compensate. I suppose ideally Autoflower seed would all be F1 crosses between highly inbred parents. The resulting hybrid vigor would make the seed vigorous and uniform. Highly inbred cultivars also tend to be uniform but inbreeding eventually results in loss of vigor. First of all do others find this high variability? Are there workarounds like planting to excess and culling slow growers? Or do you stick to quality F1 or inbred cultivars? or ????

Puzzled......

 

[Olde School Player]

You're not alone, my friend! This is a very real problem that I'm becoming more and more passionate about. Take a look at this thread I'm trying to see if we can revive:

Calling out bad Autoflower genetics/actors

yes im with you 100%, the seed breeders claims are never ever questioned, i'd like to see them prove what you are saying with documented photographic growing evidence and not just the written bullshit they have on their glossy website, i for one do not believe most breeders claims,take seed...

www.autoflower.org

My autoflower strain count is in the mid 30's, with some duplicates, and this definitely presents challenges for most growers. I am in a not-legal state so I must restrict my grows to single plants. And I donate my products to patients with a real need. Over the years I've become very adept at squeezing out the best possible yields a strain can offer, with my running average hanging around 10-12 oz. per single plant grow. But when harvested bud quality goes to shit, and/or yields drop off from runt seeds or just poorly stabilized strains, my friends / patients' lives suffer. It's not about money like the breeders view the world, it's about declining quality of life for real people when that happens.
One positive thing I have noticed in recent years is that slow flowering autoflowers seem to be going away. In my early years of autoflowers they presented quite a challenge, going against everything that breeders claimed as quick-to-harvest. Those slow flowering phenotypes were a real PITA when they took 6+ weeks to start flowering; might as well have stuck to photoperiods.

Granted, autoflower stabilization programs are more complex than traditional photoperiod strains where parentals can be cloned and both males and females can be used in backcrosses to stabilize / reduce the number of phenotypes and produce a stable strain where most-to-all seeds result in similar plants.
I'm not a breeder. I'm interested in the results but don't have the time or desire to do it. I do read that tissue culture specialists are bypassing some of the challenges in autoflower stabilization, even to the point of creating kits that will allow novice to experienced level growers to "clone" autoflower strains from a small tissue sample collected from a mature ready-to-harvest (or close) autoflower bud that appears to have so me real merit. Otherwise, I hope we can unite as consumers / growers and convince our breeder community to establish standards that result in stable product lines.

And Santa Clause will be switching to unicorns to pull his sleigh this Christmas season!

 

[Buz]

You're not alone, my friend! This is a very real problem that I'm becoming more and more passionate about. Take a look at this thread I'm trying to see if we can revive:

Calling out bad Autoflower genetics/actors

yes im with you 100%, the seed breeders claims are never ever questioned, i'd like to see them prove what you are saying with documented photographic growing evidence and not just the written bullshit they have on their glossy website, i for one do not believe most breeders claims,take seed...

www.autoflower.org

My autoflower strain count is in the mid 30's, with some duplicates, and this definitely presents challenges for most growers. I am in a not-legal state so I must restrict my grows to single plants. And I donate my products to patients with a real need. Over the years I've become very adept at squeezing out the best possible yields a strain can offer, with my running average hanging around 10-12 oz. per single plant grow. But when harvested bud quality goes to shit, and/or yields drop off from runt seeds or just poorly stabilized strains, my friends / patients' lives suffer. It's not about money like the breeders view the world, it's about declining quality of life for real people when that happens.
One positive thing I have noticed in recent years is that slow flowering autoflowers seem to be going away. In my early years of autoflowers they presented quite a challenge, going against everything that breeders claimed as quick-to-harvest. Those slow flowering phenotypes were a real PITA when they took 6+ weeks to start flowering; might as well have stuck to photoperiods.

Granted, autoflower stabilization programs are more complex than traditional photoperiod strains where parentals can be cloned and both males and females can be used in backcrosses to stabilize / reduce the number of phenotypes and produce a stable strain where most-to-all seeds result in similar plants.
I'm not a breeder. I'm interested in the results but don't have the time or desire to do it. I do read that tissue culture specialists are bypassing some of the challenges in autoflower stabilization, even to the point of creating kits that will allow novice to experienced level growers to "clone" autoflower strains from a small tissue sample collected from a mature ready-to-harvest (or close) autoflower bud that appears to have so me real merit. Otherwise, I hope we can unite as consumers / growers and convince our breeder community to establish standards that result in stable product lines.

And Santa Clause will be switching to unicorns to pull his sleigh this Christmas season!

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I checked out the thread you referenced and I will be going over it more to glean what I can. Obviously most breeders have neither the time nor the money nor sometimes the legal status to do anything like the big Agra folks manage. But the principles of fine seed production has been worked out. Inducing hybrid vigor at the same time gives fairly uniform growth pattern as well. Crossing highly inbred strains will yield Heterosis (hybrid vigor). I don't have that many seasons left so I am scouring the seed banks for highly inbred strains eg f5 and above and using those for various crosses.

 

[N/A-Greengo]

What 10 cultivars have you grown, and from what Breeders?

 

[Jpkindbud]

Twenty20 is getting to the F5-7 stages now with little variation. The bubble tricks I grew were pretty uniform. Had one that bushed but the other two were open structure. The bush I believe was operator error. Not the breeder.

 

[Buz]

Royal Cheese Auto (Royal Queen Seeds) but they were honest about variation. Sour Diesel (G-13 Labs) high variation. Red Poison (Sweet Seeds) not much variation but not very productive. LSD-25 (Fast Buds) variation. Pink Kush (CBD Dinafem?) pretty uniform. Mimosa (Seedsman freebie) two plants very different but both productive. Purple Lemonade (Fast Buds) uniform. These are what I can think of at the moment. All are with only a few plants so not very scientific, just sort of aggravating. I understand the difficulties of producing seed that giives uniform production and appreciate companies like Royal Queen Seeds that admit to variation. It is not too surprising that the genetics of Cannabis is a bit behind. Corn and Rice and Wheat have been studied for over 100 years by universities and companies. Poor Cannabis has been made illegal and relegated to smart but underground growers. Side note....I have read "The History of Hemp Production in Kentucky." A tedious but interesting read. The tragedy depicted in the book is that KY went from producing premium seed to the world for Hemp production to zip in the 1930s. They had had 100 years of breeding improvements but by the 1950s NONE of the seed could be recovered.....All that work and interest and knowledge lost forever.

 

[N/A-Greengo]

Royal Cheese Auto (Royal Queen Seeds) but they were honest about variation. Sour Diesel (G-13 Labs) high variation. Red Poison (Sweet Seeds) not much variation but not very productive. LSD-25 (Fast Buds) variation. Pink Kush (CBD Dinafem?) pretty uniform. Mimosa (Seedsman freebie) two plants very different but both productive. Purple Lemonade (Fast Buds) uniform. These are what I can think of at the moment. All are with only a few plants so not very scientific, just sort of aggravating. I understand the difficulties of producing seed that giives uniform production and appreciate companies like Royal Queen Seeds that admit to variation. It is not too surprising that the genetics of Cannabis is a bit behind. Corn and Rice and Wheat have been studied for over 100 years by universities and companies. Poor Cannabis has been made illegal and relegated to smart but underground growers. Side note....I have read "The History of Hemp Production in Kentucky." A tedious but interesting read. The tragedy depicted in the book is that KY went from producing premium seed to the world for Hemp production to zip in the 1930s. They had had 100 years of breeding improvements but by the 1950s NONE of the seed could be recovered.....All that work and interest and knowledge lost forever.

I'd suggest trying Mephisto Genetics, Twenty20 Mendocino, Dutch Passion, Night Owl, and the Joint Doctor before coming to a final conclusion. The stability and quality of these named Breeders are unmatched IMHO.

Edit to add, you must also take into consideration the stability of your grow environment as changes in perimeters (light spectrum/ intensity, temp, RH..etc) will have a direct effect on growth patterns.

 

[BII]

Perhaps, with the underlying nature of cannabis and particularly autoflower strain genetics we simply shouldn't expect high consistency among seeds. Some purposeful genetic modification seems needed to better stabilize autoflower gene replication/copying and expression.

 

[Olde School Player]

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I checked out the thread you referenced and I will be going over it more to glean what I can. Obviously most breeders have neither the time nor the money nor sometimes the legal status to do anything like the big Agra folks manage. But the principles of fine seed production has been worked out. Inducing hybrid vigor at the same time gives fairly uniform growth pattern as well. Crossing highly inbred strains will yield Heterosis (hybrid vigor). I don't have that many seasons left so I am scouring the seed banks for highly inbred strains eg f5 and above and using those for various crosses.

Keep me posted via private message on any discoveries you make. I have been disappointed by so many different strains that start as amazing, then with subsequent grows turn into a total $#it show. I am exclusively autoflower for several years, but for the right product I'd go back to photoperiods. LIke the 3-pack of Brothers' Grimm C-99 restart I purchased a few months back, heh heh.

 

[Olde School Player]

"I'd suggest trying Mephisto Genetics, Twenty20 Mendocino, Dutch Passion, Night Owl, and the Joint Doctor before coming to a final conclusion. The stability and quality of these named Breeders are unmatched IMHO."
I've heard good things about Memphisto but I've only tried one strain, Skywalker. While the strain was a very poor yielder, in all fairness they stated that in their claims. What does greatly impress me about them is the strain development discipline they adhere to, and freely publish for all to see. If I find a high producing quality strain from them I'll have no qualms going back.
Dutch Passion - tried three strains, ordinary to subpar.
The others, I haven't tried but thanks for the recommendation, I'll put them on my watch list.

"Edit to add, you must also take into consideration the stability of your grow environment as changes in perimeters (light spectrum/ intensity, temp, RH..etc) will have a direct effect on growth patterns."
Very good point. This makes it extremely challenging to coordinate a concerted effort by the masses to document grower / strain results . IMHO thats why simple strain result surveys can't be relied upon as the sole answer to this challenge. Beginner to novice growers experience beginner to novice results! I can trust my results comparing multiple grows of the same breeder strain because I have been growing cannabis since the early 1970's, and indoor growing hydroponically for 20+ years. I have a dedicated environmentally controlled grow room with multiple self contained grow areas that I select for use based upon expected strain results (size, time to harvest, special needs, etc.). And, perhaps most importantly, I have a scientifically well established nutrient and additive formulation program that has been fine tuned over the years to provide best expected results, while still adjusting to the individual differences of various strains or individual plants. But I also recognize I'm in the upper 1% echelon of growers & those growers like me can't do this alone. We need the combined purchasing power of most to all growers to make this work.

At some point we need to have most growers expect, even demand, that breeders follow best practices to stabilize their strains, and equally important, accurate strain descriptions that define what growers should expect when they purchase seeds from the breeder or seed bank. It's extremely easy to fall into the trap of "... well I bought these and grew them and got some weed out of it so I'm proud of my effort & this was a great strain & the breeder did everything except let me sleep with his wife" . The invented by me syndrome. But if I buy seeds for a strain that is spec'ed at 60 days to harvest and it ends up taking 100, thats unacceptable. If the profile of the plant is advertised as well branched and compact, but it ends up being a runt, or just as bad, a monster that grows into the lights, that's unacceptable. The old photoperiod description of multiple phenotypes, which honestly I feel we need to eliminate in autoflowers, would still be a borderline acceptable description until such time as the breeder's continued stabilization efforts bear fruit (err, buds?).

So what can we do??? This needs a more concerted effort to concentrate on documenting best practices, defining levels of methods to stabilize strains, and requiring breeders to certify adhere to those standards and practices, among other things. A voluntary adherence is probably all we can hope for until such time that (scary) governmental agencies obtain the authority to assume that role. And scary because, while I'm not anti-government, I don't believe government regulation is the answer. In my entire lifespan I have never seen a government so widely divided and uncooperative as we have today. What could work is something more like an independent third party user group organization that publishes recommendations, offers certification programs and awards vendors for meeting those standards. A "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" kind of thing, or more specifically like Underwriters Laboratories.
Or to put it simply, someone who can call bullshit to bad actors. Just because it's hard doesn't mean we're not doing it.